5 ms·
It's already possible, common and expected for people in one country to subvert the laws of another country - for instance, Americans don't think they should be
by jacalata 11y ago
It's already possible, common and expected for people in one country to subvert the laws of another country - for instance, Americans don't think they should be jailed for spreading Holocaust denialism, do they? Why should Germany not have the obvious right to enforce that law on the entire internet? How do you see that case as different to this one? (Aside, of course, from the money Hollywood is prepared to spend on it).
- FussyZeus 11y agoThe difference that springs immediately to mind is that holocaust denial is an idea, a concept, where movies and games are intellectual products not intended for free exchange. Apples and oranges.
- emodendroket 11y agoThe distinction between an "idea" and an "intellectual product" doesn't seem very satisfying.
- FussyZeus 11y agoThe distinction is whether the creator wants to profit from it or give it away.
- emodendroket 11y agoSo what if I want to sell a text that is also hate speech?
- FussyZeus 11y agoI don't think you'd have many customers, but I'm sure there are at least a few white supremacist periodicals making money in the US.
- emodendroket 11y agoOK, but the point is that we have items that could plausibly fall into either category, not that I plan to start a racist periodical.
- jacalata 11y agoThat sounds a lot like "because I agree with one set of laws and not the other".